Global tracker or managed fund for these troubled times...?

Thrugelmir

C_Mababejive said:

Thanks all for your input. As i always say, the stupidest questions are the ones that are never asked

Despite what some say to be gospel. We all never stop learning and gaining experience on our individual investment journeys. 

Sailtheworld

A global fund is going to be invested in global equities regardless of whether it's passive or managed. As it's likely to be part of a core holding why pay more?

Prism

Sailtheworld said:

A global fund is going to be invested in global equities regardless of whether it's passive or managed. As it's likely to be part of a core holding why pay more?

A factor based fund (e.g quality) costs more than an all world fund which costs more than a developed world fund. All can be passive or active but they don't all produce the same results. You should choose what you want first and check the price second, like most things in life.

Linton

Sailtheworld said:

A global fund is going to be invested in global equities regardless of whether it's passive or managed. As it's likely to be part of a core holding why pay more?

Because one can take the view that one global allocation will provide a better return than another.  Market capitalisation weighting does not guarantee maximum returns - aven if you dont want active you will find diffierent global indexes behave differently.

Sailtheworld

There are people who can assess whether one global fund will outperform another in the future. However, exceptions don't prove rules so for most people they'd be better off chasing down costs especially for the core of a portfolio.

csgohan4

When I started out investing, I always thought passive was the best, I've come to realise there is no one size fits all approach. It's what suits you and your strategy. I am holding a mixture of active and passive funds as part of a diversified portfolio. But for your satellite funds I would recommend active funds, such as for EM, Small caps e.t.c. That way they can react quicker to new companies and companies not doing well, at least in theory. 

I am coming round to the idea that active does have it's strengths, but don't underestimate passive index trackers, they ideally should be the backbone of starter investors before they get more experiences and comfortable to branching out into other sectors